Plot to blow up airlines


by Sunny
10th August, 2006 at 1:30 pm    

As many have already pointed out…

A plot to blow up planes in flight from the UK to the US and commit “mass murder on an unimaginable scale” has been disrupted, Scotland Yard has said. It is thought the plan was to detonate explosive devices smuggled in hand luggage on to as many as 10 aircraft.

Police are searching premises after 21 people were arrested. Home Secretary John Reid said they believed the “main players” were accounted for. High security is causing delays at all UK airports. [BBC Online]

News 24 is reporting that houses around Walthamstow and other parts of High Wycombe and East London were raided last night and this morning.

For some bizarre reason it’s hard to understand what actually happened and what is going on.

From various newspapers

The 21 individuals arrested earlier today were believed to include all those involved in the conspiracy to cause near-simultaneous explosions on approximately three aeroplanes travelling from the UK to the US, using explosives smuggled on board inside hand luggage, Mr Reid said. [Guardian]
…………
The Metropolitan police Deputy Commissioner, Paul Stephenson, told a news conference that police believed the aim of the plot was to smuggle explosives onto aeroplanes in hand luggage and to detonate them in flight. [Guardian]
…………
A terrorist plot has been uncovered to “commit mass murder on an unimaginable scale” by exploding up to nine aircraft in mid-flight between Britain and America, Scotland Yard announced this morning.

So far 21 suspects – believed to be British citizens, many of Pakistani origin – have been arrested under the Terrorism Act 2000 in overnight raids in London, the Thames Valley and Birmingham. [The Times]

British bloggers reactions

The UK Today: Now eventually the full details will come to light, and suspects will either be released without charge or prosecuted. And the prosecutions might succeed or fail. And successful prosecutions might be appealed against. The bottom line is that we live in such a state as a consequence of Blair’s decision to re-interpret the special relationship with America as one where British foreign policy became a mere adjunct of US policy, and Blair effectively became a Presidential Spokesman with an English accent.

Nosemonkey: We used to be told that we will not give in to terrorism. We used to be told that we will not change our way of life in the face of this new threat. Now we are told that we MUST change our way of life.

Snooo: Remember: John Charles de Menenzes did not run through the Underground station – he walked. The Forest Gate brothers did not shoot each other, as reported by the Screws – the IPCC found that a policeman had fired the gun, allegedly by mistake. There’s the Manchester United plot which came to nothing, and don’t forget the Ricin rubbish. This isn’t a conspiracy theory – security sources have fed journalists rubbish in the past and will likely do so again.

Bloggerheads: Well, how about that, then? Less than a week after the launch of the fear-o-meter and it’s already being put to good use. As of today, we have graduated from ‘severe’ to ‘scared shitless’ ‘critical’ (i.e. “an attack is expected imminently”).

Harry’s Place: The plot to blow up planes somewhere between the UK and US gets fed through the Stoppervision logic machine at Comment is Free. … It’s early days yet but further examples of Stopper logic attempting to minimise this story gratefully received in the comments box.

Pub Philosopher: We can be sure of some things though. Before the day is out, the usual suspects will claim that the attack was a response to Britain’s stance on the Israel-Hizbollah conflict.

Samizdata: Pardon me for being critical, but that is entirely meaningless. It has been raised from ‘severe – an attack is highly likely’ which is also meaningless. When I write “meaningless,” I suppose that is because I want to know what is meant by ‘an attack’, and what probabilities are adduced to distinguish between ‘unlikley’, ‘possible but not likely’ [are not those the same? - no, apparently], ‘a strong possibility’, ‘highly likely’, and ‘imminent’?

Saracen: Of course, the Intelligence services should deal with credible information, but with a track record like theirs, is there any wonder we’re not shaking? Apparently the plot revolved around liquids of some kind. Maybe some poor unsuspecting family rang eachother up to organise how they were going to take their ZamZam water on the plane?


              Post to del.icio.us


Filed in: Current affairs






169 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs


  1. Leon — on 10th August, 2006 at 1:50 pm  

    I deleted the other thread to post the link here:

    Alone among the countries of Europe, Britain pursues a foreign policy indistinguishable from that of the United States.

    Alone among the countries of Europe, Britain has not pressed for an immediate ceasefire in the month-long Middle East conflict.

    Alone among the countries of Europe, Britain has played a leading part in waging a war described by the United Nations as illegal.

    Now our diplomacy is sidelined. Our voice is an echo. Our moral authority scarcely exists. Our people are the targets of terrorism and the threats of terrorism, wherever they are, and whether they travel by underground or in the air.

    Our government has endangered us. It is time we connected the dots.link

  2. TheFriendlyInfidel — on 10th August, 2006 at 1:51 pm  

    Anyone want to put down any bets on which radical group(s) might think that killing a 1000 civilians in a single hit is a good way to a solve problem or put your point across?

    How many posts will pass before someone claims that it is Mossad, Jews, CIA, MI5, MFI or Iceland? that we don’t exist, all media is lies and the joooos run the world?

    TFI

  3. Snooo — on 10th August, 2006 at 1:53 pm  

    As I posted at my blog, early claims regarding anti-terror operations offer turn out to be erroneous. I guess we’ll just have to wait to out to find out what actually happened…

  4. TheFriendlyInfidel — on 10th August, 2006 at 1:53 pm  

    “Our government has endangered us.”

    Who exactly has our government endangered us with?

    Who exactly ought I fear retribution from as a direct result of the actions of our government?

    TFI

  5. El Cid — on 10th August, 2006 at 1:59 pm  

    Apparently liquid-based explosives, dunno what…. Police may have found baby bottle contraption..
    I had a feeling something was in the offing up when Mahmood did so well.. All that positive British moslem spin bound to provoke the jihad chav.. a bit like the London Olympics announcement last year when kids from cosmopolitan and moslem-heavy east London were seen celebrating for all it was worth

  6. Bert Preast — on 10th August, 2006 at 2:24 pm  

    The French have bent over backwards to stand for the muslims. It even looked like working, until the hijb ban in schools just made them a target again.

    The terrorists are dedicated and unwavering. At the moment we are being attacked because of our policies on Israel, Iraq and Afghanistan. If we change these policies we’ll be attacked for our policies on India, Thailand or Sudan. There’s no winning.

    Listen to what Mohammed Siddique Khan told us:

    “I and thousands like me are forsaking everything for what we believe.

    Our driving motivation doesn’t come from tangible commodities that this world has to offer.

    Our religion is Islam – obedience to the one true God, Allah, and following the footsteps of the final prophet and messenger Muhammad… This is how our ethical stances are dictated.

    Your democratically elected governments continuously perpetuate atrocities against my people all over the world.

    And your support of them makes you directly responsible, just as I am directly responsible for protecting and avenging my Muslim brothers and sisters.

    Until we feel security, you will be our targets. And until you stop the bombing, gassing, imprisonment and torture of my people we will not stop this fight.

    We are at war and I am a soldier. Now you too will taste the reality of this situation.”

    So the only way to take ourselves off the target list is to support muslims wherever they are, and whatever they do. Not much point in having a democracy then, is there?

  7. sonia — on 10th August, 2006 at 2:25 pm  

    Three Cheers for MI5! i’m sure they must have tipped the police off. Or is the news pointing to 10 lots of people all caught randomly at Heathrow> No the detail seems very hard to uncover. if they were arresting people last night sounds like my mates the Mi5 are doing their job well.

    of course, now it’s just going to be a bl**dy nightmare trying to go anywhere on a plane. this is causing worldwide disruption and ‘terror’

    ooh isn’t that what the terrorists want..( oh that and to ‘divide and conquer’..looks like they’re winning on the ‘dividing’ front..)

    phooey. just one thing after another

  8. Kismet Hardy — on 10th August, 2006 at 2:26 pm  

    If it’s liquid, I’d hazard a guess it’s Astrolite G or A-1-5

    Easy to handle and a small quantity has powerful propagation characteristics

    I know this because I’m Muslim

  9. Leon — on 10th August, 2006 at 2:27 pm  

    I never thought I’d see the day when an anarchist hails the security services…!

  10. Leon — on 10th August, 2006 at 2:30 pm  
  11. sonia — on 10th August, 2006 at 2:33 pm  

    :-) heh heh.

  12. sonia — on 10th August, 2006 at 2:37 pm  

    yes, and everyone always says how they don’t do their job..the poor things.

    well if the ‘terror plot’ has been aborted, someone must have aborted it…

    i wonder if mi5 will give me a job?

    in any case, it doesn’t really matter what news comes out or doesn’t, the end result is the same. more panic and oh we told you it wasn’t safe out there and a nice big fat excuse for government to crack down on our civil liberties. not to mention messing up air travel big time. phooey it’s just gonna be like how it was in the US post 9-11. looks like the stupid terrorists are getting what they want! as i mentioned on Snooo’s kitty kill site seems to me the terrorists and governments share certain things – desire for power, desire to control what people are thinking, divide people into this camp or that camp..

    and as we can see, all the fingerpoingting is back with a frenzy..so HERE WE GO AGAIN!

  13. TL — on 10th August, 2006 at 2:38 pm  

    There’s been some good news lately…

    1) A bunch of saddo wannabe muslim suicide bombers from the third-world fail yet again to enter heaven by murdering 12 plane loads of British holiday makers.

    2) Israel is slowly crushing Hezbollah good and proper.

  14. Leon — on 10th August, 2006 at 2:41 pm  

    i wonder if mi5 will give me a job?

    Um, I actually think they consider your politics a threat to national security?

  15. Leon — on 10th August, 2006 at 2:44 pm  

    Another blogger reacts: http://www.poliblogger.com/?p=10477

  16. Sunny — on 10th August, 2006 at 2:55 pm  

    The French have bent over backwards to stand for the muslims. It even looked like working, until the hijb ban in schools just made them a target again.

    The terrorists are dedicated and unwavering. At the moment we are being attacked because of our policies on Israel, Iraq and Afghanistan. If we change these policies we’ll be attacked for our policies on India, Thailand or Sudan. There’s no winning.

    Bert, I think its important to keep things in prospective. Those people who want to become terrorists aren’t really influenced by decisions over hijabs etc. They will see the govts as a problem anyway. The policy on hijab, which is being blown out of proportion since Sikhs have turbans and no one makes a big deal of that, is about letting people express their religion and the values French society subscribes to.

    You’re framing the debate as “concessions we have to give”, when it should be about having a set of rules or norms that apply to everyone, equally. That extends from religious freedom to access to resources.

  17. sonia — on 10th August, 2006 at 2:57 pm  

    leon – yes no doubt. and more fool them…i’d make a super secret agent.. :-) must take this all with a pinch of salt!

    i’m setting myself up as an authority on MI5 – if you google ‘MI5 current threat level’ i’m no.3!

    Of course, it would generally be interesting if our governments thought we were intelligent enough to share their intelligence with us. obviously a lot of ‘conspiracy theories’ { or what are slagged off as conspiracy theories} will result from this sort of suppressing info. what else can anyone expect?

  18. _Zain_ — on 10th August, 2006 at 3:00 pm  

    So there’s a big old threat with the planes today.
    Something about synchronised bombs going off on 10 planes over UK & US cities?

    Well it appears that the intelligence services managed to thwart the plan and arrest some 20 odd people around the country.

    Yay.

    In the words of Ali G, re-re-re-re-rewind.

    The same Intelligence that shot a Brazilian 13 times at point blank range in a case of mistaken identity?

    The same intelligence who shot and wounded a Forest Gate resident in a case of shitty intelligence?

    So what happened?
    The Intelligence Service suddenly grew some brains and managed to arrest 20 something people, foil the plan and save the day, when prior to that, they couldn’t even find the right guy, let alone arrest him?

    Or, and it might just be cynical old me, is this a shameless smokescreen?
    It seems to be par for the course.

    The second the public start to dissent and raise their collective voices against the system, something ‘happens’ to let us know just how ‘lucky’ we are.

    I can’t help but think this is a load of shit and a deliberate attempt to avert attention from Israel’s blatant disregard for human life and convention.

    The fact that people questioned the US’ agenda when it was found out that they had donated a new supply of laser-guided missiles to Israel along with $150 million gallons of aviation fuel, was enough of a warning to Washington Officials.

    This sudden ‘threat’:

    a) diverts attention
    b) reminds us just how nasty & evil those wicked muslims really are and that they need to be taught a lesson.
    c) re-installs that sense of false patriotism & jingoism.

    Sounds like a classic case of Problem – Reaction – Solution.

    Like I said; Cynical, but do you blame me?

  19. El Cid — on 10th August, 2006 at 3:02 pm  

    this could be a very big newsday.. hearing vague rumour Mrs T has kicked el cubo

  20. sonia — on 10th August, 2006 at 3:05 pm  

    well of course there’s no ‘winning’ per se -as long as some idiot out there wants to be violent. and whether that’s perpetrated by nations or terrorists to me it’s not making any difference. it does to some people and they can sit and scratch their heads how to stop that kind of violence and the rest of us can sit and scratch our heads and try and figure out to stop violence full stop.

  21. sonia — on 10th August, 2006 at 3:08 pm  

    terror is terror full stop. we can make a nice fuss about heathrow being ‘closed’ but at least we’re not having to deal with some nation like say france coming along and bombing our brains out every hour or so, and at the same time not being condemned by the ‘international community’. ‘Terrorism’ is rightly condemned – but state action isn’t automatically condemned. So not only if you lose someone in your family through state terrorism, not only do you have to deal with your pain and your anger, you also have to deal with non-acknowledgement of your pain and your anger.

  22. sonia — on 10th August, 2006 at 3:09 pm  

    no. 8 – kismet you’re so funny :-) you should be on TV really you should.

  23. El Cid — on 10th August, 2006 at 3:10 pm  

    nope, she’s alive

  24. sonia — on 10th August, 2006 at 3:13 pm  

    ah just as well for tony, he’d have to come back for her funeral!

  25. The Common Humanist — on 10th August, 2006 at 3:18 pm  

    Zain et al
    Intelligence work is much like police work. Believe it or not the UK has some of the best of both in the World. But guess what, they are human and make mistakes. Any process involving humans making decisions has a serious potential for error.

    Unfortunately people get caught in those mistakes – that poor Brazilian chap and those two guys in Forest Gate. Unfortunate and regrettable but sometimes people just fuck up.

    And often they don’t – hence today.

    Those people who you defame, presuming you are based in the UK, work as hard to protect you as they do me and they do it so that we can enjoy a free society (ok, reletively – don’t get me started on some of the anti-terror legislation) but you see what I mean.

    I don’t have a sense of false patriotism – I am a very critical citizen and friend of my country – but I also know that compared to most places the UK is a good place to live. And, ahem, a damn site better then the places that the jihadist chavs aspire to emulate.

    And its also, so my muslim friends tell me, easier to be a muslim in the UK then back in the ME (their Sufis).

    So go figure them apples.

  26. Kismet Hardy — on 10th August, 2006 at 3:24 pm  

    I think the fact that places that practice strict sharia law are backward inbreds or what have you, is the precise reason why the oh so civilised west shouldn’t be making arses of themselves by propagating the same kind of shit (propaganda, torture, supplying weapons, knee-jerk reactions blah blah) that they condemn the scum of the earth for

  27. Bert Preast — on 10th August, 2006 at 3:29 pm  

    Sunny wrote: “You’re framing the debate as “concessions we have to give”, when it should be about having a set of rules or norms that apply to everyone, equally. That extends from religious freedom to access to resources”

    You’re right. Yet the French ban was a rule that applies to everyone, equally. Well, everyone at least who likes to wear their religion on their sleeve, as it were. But no matter – it didn’t take the brains of an archbishop to figure out which group would consider themselves targeted, and get most upset.

    Of course, they were probably right – the ban was targetting muslims, mostly the more conservative girls. But in today’s world it’s not PC to target specific groups, and the ban was applied in a blanket fashion. Thus winding up those who’s religious persuasion couldn’t be spotted from 5 metres away, let alone 500 metres away, and still upsetting the specific group you wanted to target without upsetting.

    Lovely.

  28. Yakoub/Julaybib — on 10th August, 2006 at 3:41 pm  

    I don’t get it. Why did they announce a plot had been ‘foiled’ and then tell everyone the airports would be reduced to chaos? I mean, foiled does mean stopped, defeated, ended, right? Now it’s just been ‘disrupted’. What next? The ‘plot’ will be ‘curtailed’, ‘downsized’ and then ‘significantly incapacitated’. Is this terror policy by consultancy speak or just a sign that the whole thing is little more than a rescue plan for Senator B-liar?

    Wasalaam

    TMA

  29. Raul — on 10th August, 2006 at 3:46 pm  

    Some of you guys deserve to be on planes that get bombed. You certainly don’t deserve the protection of the intelligence agencies you so despise. They may get it wrong not once once but many times but how many of you would take the chance, they could get it right. And that’s what matters.

    I’m not here to defend Israel’s actions or any of the actions that are the root causes of muslim disenchantment. But I feel that if you feel something is wrong there is a better way to try to protest, and get your point across and try to resolve the problem. Why are some of you firing from the shoulders of madmen who go around blowing up people. Which means you find their way an acceptable way of protest in which case there is no argument. Whatever your case terrorism is not the answer. So those of you come here pretending to be civilized with intellectual arguments, you have chosen to support barbarians who aspire for the most closed societies where everything is controlled by self appointed and righteous moral guardians, for your cause. That makes you one of them. There is no other way but to condemn terrorists and then fight you cause in the way you think right. Mixing up the two and talking about western subterfuge in every incident of terrorist violence makes you their mouthpiece and some of you presumably are.

    I thinks muslims are looking for reasons to feel victimized which is why you draw across the muslim population across the globe to connect and maginfy incidents that could be afflicting muslims to mean more than it does. This victim mentality is the root cause of this unaacceptable violence by islamic fanatics. When is the last time you responded as a human being rather than a muslim to events around the world, which is why there is little empathy for the victims of terrorism or anything that afflicts poeple who are not muslims. The world is not fair, get over it.

  30. El Cid — on 10th August, 2006 at 3:52 pm  

    Zain/Yokoub — you’re mad

  31. sonia — on 10th August, 2006 at 3:53 pm  

    ooh 29 – “Some of you guys deserve to be on planes that get bombed”

    sounds like a terrorist threat to me! or the first step in thinking murderous thoughts..isn’t that what the terrorists might have thought ‘ oh yeah some of you deserve to know what x in palestine feels like..’ to ‘ i know ..i’ll show ‘em how it feels to be on a train that blows up..’

    i’d better ring my mates at MI5..

  32. sonia — on 10th August, 2006 at 3:54 pm  

    heh heh ‘the world is not fair get over it’ could also be the sort of thing that terrorist would say [‘oh stop whining about all those ‘innocent’ dead people ..the world is not a fair place – get over it and quit with the war on terror…’

    :-) Raul my poor friend you are in a bit of trouble now

  33. sonia — on 10th August, 2006 at 3:55 pm  

    kismet – no. 26 spot on

  34. leon — on 10th August, 2006 at 4:00 pm  

    Raul, you’re a prick.

    this could be a very big newsday.. hearing vague rumour Mrs T has kicked el cubo

    Don’t crack that bottle of champaign just yet that rumour has been doing the rounds for the last week or so…

  35. Saracen — on 10th August, 2006 at 4:01 pm  

    only too true sonia,

    It’s funny how many times I’ve found that the bandwagon-type thinking exhibited by people like Raul (31), and thinking thinking that drives terrorists boils down to the exact same logic.

    Think about it:
    Terrorists: we must punish the West (inc. civilians) for the crimes they (leaders) have commited against us.
    UK Government/Daily Mail/Sun/etc..: we must punish Iraq (inc. civilians) for the crimes they (Saddam) have commited against us.

    Just swap the landmarks, references, names and media, and hey presto…

  36. Saracen — on 10th August, 2006 at 4:04 pm  

    And before anyone jumps me, saying that in Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon, civilians are not targetted, but collateral, words hold no real meaning when the numbers speak otherwise.

  37. Bert Preast — on 10th August, 2006 at 4:06 pm  

    Saracen wrote:

    “Terrorists: we must punish the West (inc. civilians) for the crimes they (leaders) have commited against us.
    UK Government/Daily Mail/Sun/etc..: we must punish Iraq (inc. civilians) for the crimes they (Saddam) have commited against us”

    Except we punished Saddam for the crimes he committed against Kuwait.

  38. eteraz — on 10th August, 2006 at 4:22 pm  

    Um, wow.

    I can’t believe your media is obsessed with the ‘fault’ of the British foreign policy.

    The ‘fault’ here is the Muslim community that is breeding this stuff. Full stop (that’s me being British).

    And I say this as a Muslim and as someone who spends half his time defending Muslims.

  39. leon — on 10th August, 2006 at 4:29 pm  

    Ah, eteraz is an Eustonite, next!

  40. Sunny — on 10th August, 2006 at 4:32 pm  

    I think a healthy degree of scepticism of the intelligence service’s operations is natural given recent debacles. The list is long.

    At the same time is not unnatural to argue that there are a small minority of Muslims who use foreign policy and their religion as an excuse to kill others.

    So I think we shall have to wait and see. This is one of the reasons why I haven’t really made a comment on the issue.

    Saying that, I think the farcical way the govt behaves on such issues (“the terror threat is almost certainly very likely at the most critical level in the history of the universe and we’re all going to die if someone as much as sneezes”) is getting tiring.

    I still have more chance of dying by being accidentally run over by a car than by a terrorist.

    The American govt has already “suggested” Al-Qaeda involvement when, well the term is already quite meaningless.

  41. Sunny — on 10th August, 2006 at 4:35 pm  

    Eustonite or not, I think we have to challenge arguments on their basis rather than who they come from (unless its the LGF or Michelle Malkin crew).

    There is in my opinion a tendency to blame everything on foreign policy as if that is that will solve all our problems. Though trying to bomb people into submission won’t solve our problems either.

  42. leon — on 10th August, 2006 at 4:36 pm  

    Fact is, there are very little actual facts. They are suspects at present, it hasn’t been proved (in a court of law) that a plot or attempt had taken place or that they are behind it.

    All we have is the security services/police (those that said there were WMD in Iraq, or the Stockwell shooting was of a terrorists, or those blokes in Forest Gate grabbed the gun and shot themselves) saying all this and a lackey like media lapping it up for public consumption.

  43. soru — on 10th August, 2006 at 4:36 pm  

    ‘Just swap the landmarks, references, names and media, and hey presto… ‘.

    By that logic, arresting a kidnapper is an act of hypocrisy. If you change are the names, places, those involved, their methods, goals, ideologies and similar irrelevant details, you are very likely to lose the plot of what you are talking about.

    If there was some big shari’a court off in Mecca that judged acts of terror, and sometimes came to the conclusion ‘that was not a legitimate act of jihad’, and dealt out punishment to those who comitted it, then morally that might be little different, but structurally it would be comparable. There would be rules you could choose to follow, and you’d have some confidence that if you followed those rules, the terrorists wouldn’t come for you.

    And alternatively you could say ‘screw that, I’m not following those rules, let’s have a fight’.

    The thing is, that court doesn’t exist, there are no such rules. That makes the situation, at the least, less symetric than it would be if there were.

  44. leon — on 10th August, 2006 at 4:39 pm  

    Eustonite or not, I think we have to challenge arguments on their basis rather than who they come from

    I know, was just messing really…;)

    There is in my opinion a tendency to blame everything on foreign policy as if that is that will solve all our problems.

    Sure the SWP but the left is broader than that (despite what they or the Eustonites would have us believe). Foreign Policy is a part of this (maybe even a defining part) but you’re right it’s broader than that.

  45. Bert Preast — on 10th August, 2006 at 4:42 pm  

    Foreign policy has always been a cause for civil discontent, and always will be.

  46. eteraz — on 10th August, 2006 at 4:49 pm  

    Our Muslim communities are fucked up. I don’t expect, or want, people on the outside to fix them. But I do want to support that Muslims should do something about them. That means that the focus should not be on the foreign policy, but on the state of the individual people.

  47. Bert Preast — on 10th August, 2006 at 4:51 pm  

    Leon – The shooting in Forest Gate wasn’t an accident. Apparently the standard operating procedures say that the safety catch should be off, and in that case the finger rests alongside the trigger guard. However, if under threat of attack, including an attempt to disarm one, then the finger is on the trigger.

    So don’t grab the weapon – it’ll almost certainly go off.

    Though this is part of why the army should be doing this, not the police. A house raid needs masses of aggression, which means to control the suspects, not kill them. It needs men who live, slepp, eat and breathe weapons, and are not nervous when handling them under threat. You only need to look at the army’s record in Northern Ireland, and contrast it with the record of the Metplod when tooled up. And the army maintained that record while under a far greater threat, and using teenagers with machineguns rather than men in their mid 30s with pistols.

  48. Saracen — on 10th August, 2006 at 5:08 pm  

    What I’m trying to opine, is that the deluded and simplistic logic that drives terrorists to do what they do, is no different to the logic behind the drivel we’re fed by some mass media. It’s all about blame, revenge and collective-punishment.

    Foreign policy may not be the reason for what happens but it’s a damn good catalyst. I keep hearing the idea that 9/11 proves that foreign policy isn’t behind these occurrences, as if our memories go no further back than 2001. I sincerely believe that there are few rabid, blood-thirsty lunatics who just want to kill for the sake of it. Those who perpetrate these actions, do so, intoxicated with a dangerous concoction of religious ignorance, empathy with suffering people, helplessness and unwillingness to accept all they are led to believe.

    By labeling every form of resistance or struggle around the world as terrorism, you take people who may have legitimate grievances and push them into the extreme crowd. Rather than allow healthy discussion with thoughtful analysis, anyone who dares differ with the accepted norm is an apologist for terror. Where then do you expect people who feel aggrieved to get their direction from?

  49. Steven J — on 10th August, 2006 at 5:10 pm  

    leon

    Take a look at eteraz’s blog and his bio before being so disdainful and dismissive of him.

  50. Steven J — on 10th August, 2006 at 5:16 pm  

    Saracen

    Yeah – I know, those poor suffering misunderstood bastards who slaughtered 55 people in London, and these guys who plotted to blow up a plane of children and women and man going to Disneyland in Florida. We mustnt describe them as bastards or describe apologists for their acts as terrorist apologists or else people like you will have your feelings hurt, poor diddums, and be forced into the arms of the ‘tiny minority’ of extremists who want to slaughter the infidels.

    Take it on the chin. Be robust. Analyse the consistent use of fascist slaughter by Islamists against Africans in Nairobi, Americans in New York, Britons in London, Spaniards in Madrid. Take a look, join the dots, and see that there is a massive problem with some Islamist philosophy, and don’t whine when fascist murdering terrorist bastards are described as such, and their apologists are also so described.

  51. Bert Preast — on 10th August, 2006 at 5:16 pm  

    Saracen – In my experience terrorists usually aren’t in it for the bloodlust deathcult stuff. They’re there because it gives them a cause, gives their lives a meaning, gives access to weaponry without having to go through all that tedious military bullshit, gives a certain freedom of action, gives them respect from their peers and marks them out as not among the meek, gets them laid, and because it’s like a mafia. Sort of a perceived noble guardian of public morals while robbing the public blind.

    So, chodwits, really.

  52. Roger — on 10th August, 2006 at 5:25 pm  

    “And before anyone jumps me, saying that in Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon, civilians are not targetted, but collateral, words hold no real meaning when the numbers speak otherwise.”
    Not at all. If Israel were targetting civilians there would be a zero or two more on the end of the death tally. What the IDF has done is foolish and bad enough. Don’t attack them for nonexistent atrocities.

  53. Leon — on 10th August, 2006 at 5:29 pm  

    Good piece on Blairwatch:

    I don’t suppose we’ll ever know if there was a plot unless it actually happens, God forbid. We might get a better idea when the 21 people arrested so far get a trial (assuming they get a trial, or even charged). If there is a threat, (and, it does at least seem plausible) then some precautions are obviously necessary, but there is still no reason at all to trample all over the justice system. I still agree with that quote from the philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau – “I prefer liberty with danger than peace with slavery”. That is the concept that John Reid just doesn’t get. Meanwhile, the Lebanon/ Israel conflict seems to have been forgotten.

    http://www.blairwatch.co.uk/node/1288

  54. Zussy — on 10th August, 2006 at 5:30 pm  

    Let’s take a look at the long list of British Muslims who have killed themselves or tried to kill themselves and others in the name of Islamic extremism.

    It goes back to the 1990′s, and including scuppered plots, it goes back to two Pakistani men from Derby and Hounslow blowing themselves up in Israel, British Muslims blowing themselves up in Kashmir, British Muslims blowing themselves up in London, British Muslims luring Daniel Pearl for his decapitation in Pakistan, British Muslims failing to blow themselves up on July 21st, British Muslims failing to blow up airlines by shoe bomb (Richard Reid and Sajid Badat), British Muslims plotting explode a fertiliser bomb outside the Ministry of Sound to slaughter the ‘dancing sluts’, and now British Muslims plotting to blow up ten planes in mid air.

    There are countless other examples. So. It is plain to see to anyone but the most prejudiced, stupid or blind that there is a massive problem of a terrorist and murderous ideology rampant amongst a certain section of British Muslims. The real debate needs to take place amongst British Muslims as to why this disgusting fascist racist murderous ideology is so delightful to a section of them. Everyone else in Britain is free and obliged to chime in and describe this ideology, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, atheists, because this it is our lives that this ideology preys on.

    This is not ‘resistance’, any more than Combat 18 and Neo Nazi terrorists are ‘resistance’.

    There have been so many wake up calls, and yet still so many people are asleep. What will it take to rouse them from their coma? Who knows. Either way, the debate cannot be circumscribed by people like Saracen. These people are arising from the suburbs and streets of England, from leafy streets and middle class homes. How this Nazism arises, how it breeds, how it feeds off itself, how it pre-dates all the factors said to ‘catalyse’ it, how it festers in a pool of Islamist ideology have to be examined closely and rigourously and without reserve.

  55. Saracen — on 10th August, 2006 at 5:31 pm  

    Steven, you seem to be mixing issues. As for labelling terrorists I’m not talking about them, I’m talking about legitimate Palestinian resistance, legitimate Chechen resistance and so on. Theses things get put into the same basket as everything else and you end up with the mess that’s there now. Palestinian ‘militants’ have condemned every one of the attacks you’ve mentioned, yet they are still terrorists.

    I’m sure there are people in Lebanon right now who are calling the Israelis all manner of names for slaugtering families upon families. They’ve seen it for years, the Palestinians have seen it for decades, why aren’t they allowed to join the dots?

    I unequivocally condemn any terrorist acts targetted at civilians, as does anyone with half a consience. But looking for reasons is not justification.

  56. Sunny — on 10th August, 2006 at 5:32 pm  

    Steven J, I think you may want to read Saracen’s point again:

    What I’m trying to opine, is that the deluded and simplistic logic that drives terrorists to do what they do, is no different to the logic behind the drivel we’re fed by some mass media. It’s all about blame, revenge and collective-punishment.

    I think that is very valid. I’ve said something quite similar here many times, specially with the recent thread on Lebanon on Hizbullah. It really is annoying to see people make vast, silly generalisations.

    It is so much like Hizb ut Tahrir and their ilk do – “western people are like this, and that and they all drink and have unprotected sex and their society is falling apart” etc.

    Let’s try and have an informed discussion sometimes?

  57. zahed — on 10th August, 2006 at 5:32 pm  

    Our Muslim communities are fucked up. I don’t expect, or want, people on the outside to fix them. But I do want to support that Muslims should do something about them. That means that the focus should not be on the foreign policy, but on the state of the individual people.

    hear hear. and i do believe this will be a long, long struggle.

  58. Bert Preast — on 10th August, 2006 at 5:34 pm  

    ” I still agree with that quote from the philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau – “I prefer liberty with danger than peace with slavery”. ”

    Yeah, but the French peasants alternative to liberty was pretty much slavery. The situation does not apply to British muslims.

  59. Saracen — on 10th August, 2006 at 5:36 pm  

    No debate has been precluded here. But if it’s a blame debate, then good luck to you; it won’t change anything. If debate is actually open and frank, looking at the reasons for this phenomenon, and what can be done to combat it, then all the better.

    And just to make it clear, in case someone has been fooled by Zussy putting words into my mouth (or keyboard, I should say), the sort of resistance I’m talking about is not the bombing of innocent civilians.

  60. Steven J — on 10th August, 2006 at 5:37 pm  

    Saracen

    The reasons why terrorists explode bombs and kill themselves on the London Underground or plot to blow up airplanes mid air is because they are terrorist fascists and their ideology leads them to do that. If a racist comes to your house and blows it up and kills you and your family, it will be because he is a terrorist racist fascist. Looking for his reasons will not be justification, but pointless, because the act is self condemnatory. You and your family will still be dead at the hand of a racist fascist, and his reasons will still make him contemptible.

    So, the next time a Combat 18 bomber blows up a mosque, will we hear about the need to understand the reasons why he did this? Maybe, but if we hear things like:

    “I condemn this disgusting act, BUT WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND WHERE HE COMES FROM….2

    It would not be unfair to say that this is an example of attempted exculpation.

    Same with those who wet their pants trying to find the ‘reason’ why fascist scumbags kill commuters on the tube.

    Do you understand and sympathise with their reasons Saracen?

  61. Steven J — on 10th August, 2006 at 5:40 pm  

    Sunny

    Is it so difficult to say that the ‘resistance’ of Lebanon has nothing to do with blowing planes out of the sky at Heathrow or blowing up girls from Camden Town on their way to work? When you should be pulling your hair out at the obscenity of this virus, why make it your first priority to worry about what people say about ‘resistance’ movements elsewhere?

  62. Saracen — on 10th August, 2006 at 5:49 pm  

    Steven, if the reason was simply that someone was a terrorist fascist, then this would have been known of them, they would never have mixed with anyone, they would have shown this throughout their life. Instead, we have normal upright individuals, who change, and the result is as we had on 7/7. The question that needs to be asked is what caused that change? Unfortunately for those outside the Muslim community, it looks like there are hundreds of people just waiting for their chance to kill, maim and plunder; this just isn’t true.

  63. Bert Preast — on 10th August, 2006 at 5:57 pm  

    Saracen – But they did mix with someone. They found plenty of like minded individuals to mix with, and sometimes fairly quickly.

    MI5 believe there are over 1500 active terrorists, and that may mean just British born ones. That’s under 0.1% of the muslim population, and I’ve seen nothing to suppose that they’re overestimating.

  64. Zak — on 10th August, 2006 at 6:00 pm  

    The good news is they’ve been caught..as far as the usual terrorist and black and white approach ..i am on the fence with it..i believe you can kill as many mosquitoes as you want but you can only stop getting bitten by draining the swamp.

  65. Bert Preast — on 10th August, 2006 at 6:04 pm  

    Zak wrote: “i believe you can kill as many mosquitoes as you want but you can only stop getting bitten by draining the swamp”

    Quite right, but the problem here is there’s no central authority we can trust to tell us exactly how the swamp may be drained.

  66. Sunny — on 10th August, 2006 at 6:06 pm  

    When you should be pulling your hair out at the obscenity of this virus, why make it your first priority to worry about what people say about ‘resistance’ movements elsewhere?

    Steven,

    After reading my articles on PP and elsewhere it should be obvious I’m not afraid of criticising specific Muslim groups or ideologies or people. Stupid arguments have to be tackled from people of whatever colour or religion.

    My point is that we end up frequently conflating issues that have little to do with each other. People compare Lebanon, Chechnya, USA and the UK when they have little to do with each other other than the fact they involve Muslims on one side and white people on the other.

    Understanding the scope of the threat, its origins etc is surely central to solving / getting rid of it? Or do you also simply see it as a clash of civilisations?

  67. TheFriendlyInfidel — on 10th August, 2006 at 6:13 pm  

    And just to make it clear, in case someone has been fooled by Zussy putting words into my mouth (or keyboard, I should say), the sort of resistance I’m talking about is not the bombing of innocent civilians.

    Saracen, could you do me a favour and repeat that, but drop the word “innocent”? I get very confused about who is or isn’t “innocent”.

    TFI

  68. Saracen — on 10th August, 2006 at 6:19 pm  

    I oblige TFI:

    the sort of resistance I’m talking about is not the bombing of civilians.

  69. TheFriendlyInfidel — on 10th August, 2006 at 6:22 pm  

    People compare Lebanon, Chechnya, USA and the UK when they have little to do with each other other than the fact they involve Muslims on one side and white people on the other.

    Actually Sunny when I talk about it I include Bali, Kashmir, Thailand and Banagladesh. The common thread in all these places isn’t white people being killed by Asians, its non-Muslims and Muslims being killed by Islamist Muslims that inspired by the teachings of Jihad.

    TFI

  70. TheFriendlyInfidel — on 10th August, 2006 at 6:23 pm  

    Saracen, you’re alright mate.

  71. TheFriendlyInfidel — on 10th August, 2006 at 6:29 pm  

    Or do you also simply see it as a clash of civilisations?

    Its not really a clash of civilisations, its a clash of morals and understanding. Its a battle of Good vs Evil, Wrong vs Right. The problem is that different people have diametrically opposed views of these abstract concepts.

    Its just that the morals that are being clashed about are associated with particular civilisations. Claims for the “Clash of Civilizations” sounds dreadfully grandeur, but isn’t very a useful description.

    TFI

  72. Bert Preast — on 10th August, 2006 at 6:34 pm  

    If there really was a clash, it wouldn’t have lasted anything like this long.

  73. eteraz — on 10th August, 2006 at 6:37 pm  

    i have made a posting on this subject in case anyone cares

    http://eteraz.wordpress.com/2006/08/10/muslim-muslims-on-british-muslims/

  74. raz — on 10th August, 2006 at 6:49 pm  

    Apparently it was Pakistani intelligence which supplied the tip off to the British authorities. ISI once again proves itself to be one of the best intelligence services in the world.

  75. Bert Preast — on 10th August, 2006 at 6:52 pm  

    Eteraz – that’s a good piece. I’d pick a couple of holes in it, but we get nowhere without compromise. So I’ll just say good stuff.

  76. eteraz — on 10th August, 2006 at 6:59 pm  

    raz, ur source?

  77. raz — on 10th August, 2006 at 7:00 pm  

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2306811,00.html

    I expect more details will be coming out in next few days.

  78. Arif — on 10th August, 2006 at 7:38 pm  

    Eteraz, that was an interesting set of musings. I will still pick a hole, just because something struck me as just not making sense from my own experience as a British Muslim.

    The thing is, if your magic wand could change British foreign policy, the whole rhetoric which draws people to the zealous leafleteer outside the mosque would have to be completely different.

    What gets people angry enough to get involved with these groups are all the familiar foreign policy issues (and a few domestic political issues, but to a lesser extent). The leaflets can be surprisingly well argued when they analyse the ruthless evil of western imperialism before somehow illogically concluding that the solution is an Islamic State or joining a separatist organisation which goes out of its way to “protect fellow Muslims” to the seeming exclusion of everyone else.

    The point I just want to make is that people seem to me to be attracted to these groups in the first instance because of a persuasive anti-imperialist stance – and these groups know and exploit this. If they did not have that, I doubt they would have much to attract anyone at the mosques I attend.

    End of note to Eteraz…

    I realise that many people here are very touchy about any possible expression of sympathy for terrorists, especially by Muslims, and because they are understandably angry may rush to condemn me as an “apologist” etc. So to save time, for everyone above who thinks understanding why person x ever got angry means I think person x is right to kill me, please note I don’t jump to such a conclusion. To those who think I would not want to understand why other fascists get angry, I can assure you I do.

    To those who wish to accuse me of moral equivalence, however, I plead guilty. I think a politically-motivated Muslim killer is not better or worse than a politically-motivated non-Muslim killer. And I try to judge the political motives of both against the same sets of principles. And also judge the acts of both against the same sets of principles.

    I hope the would-be terrorists fail in their goals, are convicted in court and repent. Just to be clear.

  79. Vikrant — on 10th August, 2006 at 7:41 pm  

    ISI once again proves itself to be one of the best intelligence services in the world.

    d’oh.. nother bout of nationalistic epilepsy… raz?

  80. TheFriendlyInfidel — on 10th August, 2006 at 8:00 pm  

    Vikrant, which intelligence service do you think does a better job?

  81. El Cid — on 10th August, 2006 at 8:03 pm  

    Instead, we have normal upright individuals, who change, and the result is as we had on 7/7.
    Normal, upright? I don’t think so.

  82. Vikrant — on 10th August, 2006 at 8:11 pm  

    Vikrant, which intelligence service do you think does a better job?

    Only thing ISI is good at is terrorism.

  83. Bikhair aka Taqiyyah — on 10th August, 2006 at 8:29 pm  

    TheFriendly,

    “…the teachings of Jihad.”

    I too am inspired by these teachings. They are indeed very inspirational.

  84. Bikhair aka Taqiyyah — on 10th August, 2006 at 8:34 pm  

    Raul & The Friendly,

    When Raul says :This victim mentality is the root cause of this unaacceptable violence by islamic fanatics.

    And when The Friendly says: …that inspired by the teachings of Jihad.

    Are these two mutually exclusive or does one co-opt the other.

  85. Vikrant — on 10th August, 2006 at 8:42 pm  

    I too am inspired by these teachings. They are indeed very inspirational.

    Taquiyyah at its best…

  86. eteraz — on 10th August, 2006 at 8:45 pm  

    Arif,

    >>The point I just want to make is that people seem to me to be attracted to these groups in the first instance because of a persuasive anti-imperialist stance – and these groups know and exploit this. If they did not have that, I doubt they would have much to attract anyone at the mosques I attend.>>

    I have to contend with that. You are basically saying that imperialism gets people going. If it didn’t exist, nothing would get them going. I addressed that in my post.

    >>He would target Western “materialism.” He would target Western “hedonism.” He would target Western “secularism.” Just as a fanatic can look to the television and see dead Muslim children around the world to fuel his rancor, he would be able to find on the television any number of other “catalysts” to fuel his behavior. Not only that, but he would find in his Salafi tomes (Qutb written, Saudi paid), those catalysts (like the flesh of the Western woman)[there occurs a link to a quote by Qutb].>>

    I’m sure you’ve read Milestones by Qutb. How much of it is anti-imperialist or anti-Israel? Yet how much more of it is anti-materialist or anti-hedonist? I’m not saying that these guys all act like how we think Qutb believed. I am saying that there are many more ‘ills’ that the fanatic has identified in the West than just its imperialist leanings. Think about it like this: Christian groups have produced many domestic terrrorists and they have *no* foreign policy quibbles whatsoever.

    My other problem with the conclusino that Muslims are turned towards extremism because of foreign policy is that it is actually both racist and counter-productive. Wherein has the assertion been proven that all Muslims think alike? No where. Yet, somehow we are to conclude that when it comes to foreign policy, we do? The reason it is counter-productive is that it reinforces in the head of the youth the idea that it IS about foreign policy (simply due to the repetitiousness of it). Never is domestic social justice even raised (I’m not talking about ending profilling, but of soup kitchens and the like). Why doesn’t the discourse argue: “the fanatics are psycho because they aren’t into charity.” It is such reversals and transmutations of rhetoric (used positively) that create change. Language is where the first battle has to be won.

  87. Bert Preast — on 10th August, 2006 at 8:48 pm  

    innit.

  88. Vikrant — on 10th August, 2006 at 8:53 pm  

    shit i’ve been tracking my mum’s fligth all day.. BA keeps delaying it every 15 minutes… fuckers

  89. mirax — on 10th August, 2006 at 9:35 pm  

    >>a persuasive anti-imperialist stance

    maybe persuasive to those who are eager to be convinced but not that coherent because it draws a crazy ‘continuum’ of western deviousness from
    the crusades to colonialism (muslims were special victims) to WW2 (postwar creation of Isreal) to coldwar shenanigans (we get a nice socialist mishmash here, focussing on the Brit/CIA manipulation in deposing of the Iranian PM and installing the frightful Shah rather than the USSR invasion of Afghanistan) and ending up with the antiglobalisation movement centred against the US.

    There is a huge amount of muslim on muslim violence that gets left out of the narrative or airbrushed as having happened only as a result of western instigation or ‘propping’ up of dictators. Non-western ‘oppressors’ of muslim peoples ike China, Thailand or the Philippines don’t seem to count.
    Muslim violence against non-muslims doesn’t get a look in of course.

    It is not foreign policy but a newly-risen, highly politicised ummah consciousness that feeds the angst while with the terrorist killers, it is religious fanaticism, as Eteraz mentions, which is itself driven by personal inadequacies (rather than the religion itself*)

    * One reads what one wants to in a religion, any religion. it always has what you need, you just need to look hard enough, from the right angle, with one eye closed….

  90. raz — on 10th August, 2006 at 9:36 pm  

    ISI just saved thousands of innocent lives, which might have even included your mum Vikant. They deserve the worlds thanks.

  91. mirax — on 10th August, 2006 at 9:40 pm  

    You’ve just put Vik in a tight spot there Raz. Thanking the ISI for saving mum! Who would have thought it?

  92. raz — on 10th August, 2006 at 9:45 pm  

    LOL :)

  93. mirax — on 10th August, 2006 at 10:02 pm  

    >>>poeple listen to khutbah in complex urdu (or other native tongue) do not understand any, then perform a ritual prayer, which they do not understand the concept of. Then as they leave they are given a leaflet by HT etc with dead children on it written in ENGLISH. The leaflet says what they want to hear and attracts them in a language they understand.

    That ans eteraz’s point about parental instruction or at the least a closer supervision of the religious teachers. Chimes with my experience.My muslim friends in school could tell me barely anything about their faith, not even the meanings of the prayers. My students ( I tutored a lot of muslim kids on a voluntary basis for a number of years)went to the mosques or had religious teachers coming home to teach. The focus was almost solely on recitation and memorisation, rather than a discussion of values or principles. I knew one or two of the religious teachers – one was definitely making things up as she went along and one of the parents realised it but was too nice to remonstrate. It was amazing to realise how little so many muslim kids know of their religion. There were very few books written specifically for children, but that seems to changing slowly now.

  94. TC — on 10th August, 2006 at 10:11 pm  

    ” Christian groups have produced many domestic terrrorists and they have *no* foreign policy quibbles whatsoever ”

    I see this quote trotted out by apologists for Islamic Facists regularly.

    It’s just not true.

    In modern history there have been no “Christian Terrorists”.

    Northern Ireland in the 1970′s to 1990′s in now way comparable to the phenomenon of Islamic Facism in 21st Century Britain. It was about land, sovereignty, state corruption and ultimately a period of ethnic cleansing where whole streets were being burt out.

    There is NOTHING comparable between Muslims in 2006 Britain and 1960s/1970s Northern Ireland.

    While broadly the warring communities were defined along historic religious lines, in reality their “religion” may have been nothing more than a traditional identifier, with the people perhaps just as secular as the rest of the UK.

    It was not Catholic or Protestant, but Nationalist/Republican or Unionist/Loyalist.

    There were no video messages from terrorists holding bibles, no scripture headbands, no religious quote during the act of screams of “Alluh Akbar” as they engaged in their murderous actions.

    Those in the Muslim community who keep harping on about “Christian Terrorism” should concentrate on their own house instead of pointing at others.

    Although I will conceed that in that quaint way that some Muslims insist on attempting moral equivalence by pointing to an obscure incident from say, December 1123, it is arguable that Guy Fawkes circa the 1600s’ was a “Christian Terrorist”. Although we have moved on a bit from then.

    It’s just a shame that Islam seems incapable of the same progress in 400 years.

  95. raz — on 10th August, 2006 at 10:17 pm  

    “In modern history there have been no “Christian Terrorists””

    Nonsense. For instance, the Lord’s Resistance army in Uganda has killed tens of thousands of people, all ‘justified’ by the bible. Or is it only terrorism when Westerners are killed?

  96. TC — on 10th August, 2006 at 10:40 pm  

    ” Christian groups have produced many domestic terrrorists and they have *no* foreign policy quibbles whatsoever ”

    Domestic.

    Let me clarify. I have heard some British Muslims, and British apologists for terrorism, and British apologists for “the youth” who see a jihad porno DVD about “Brothers In Chechnya” and decide that Islamic terrorism in London is an appropriate response.

    These British Muslims who talk about “Christian Terrorists” and in every example to date they have referred to the Northern Ireland situation of the 1960s to 1990s.

    This was what I was referring to.

    Until this evening Raz, no British Muslim / Apologist / Appeaser had specifically mentioned the terrorists you speak of, and therefore my comment was directly related to previous comments.

  97. peter — on 10th August, 2006 at 10:41 pm  

    Not sure ‘islamic terrorists’ is an oxymoron’but I agree that islamic terrorists are morons. Still, a textbook cowardly attempt to avoid responsibility for those lovely people sharing your totalitarian death cult.

  98. Arif — on 10th August, 2006 at 10:44 pm  

    Thanks for the response Eteraz.

    I don’t mean to say that if imperialism did not exist, nothing would get people going. I would argue, though, that what would get people going most probably wouldn’t be anything on the menu offered by the radical Muslim right (I don’t know what to call them, but you know who I mean). The anti-materialism and anti-hedonism etc has some purchase (for some reason, I find, especially for converts), but I don’t think it would get the people around me seething in anything like the same way as wars and occupations. It is hard to prove or disprove, all either of us can go on is our judgments of the people around us. There would still be Qutbists around, just as you bring up the Christian terrorists being around, but the task you and I have of marginalising them would be so much easier.

    On the issue of Muslims thinking alike. I don’t believe Muslims think alike, I’m sorry if I gave that impression. I do think global affairs seem to resonate a lot particularly among younger people, not just Muslims – the biggest demos in the UK recently have been against the invasion of Iraq and in favour of “Make Poverty History”.

    When it comes to rhetorical tactics for arguing against the hatemongers, I tend to take them seriously, be honest about my own views and ask them to be consistent in their concerns for others. It seems like a variation on your theme, I don’t say its hugely effective, but it’s what’s comfortable for me.

  99. Bikhair aka Taqiyyah — on 11th August, 2006 at 12:05 am  

    Vikrant,

    “Taquiyyah at its best…”

    I dont understand can you please explain what you mean by this.

  100. Bikhair aka Taqiyyah — on 11th August, 2006 at 12:08 am  

    eteraz,

    “Not only that, but he would find in his Salafi tomes (Qutb written, Saudi paid), those catalysts (like the flesh of the Western woman)[there occurs a link to a quote by Qutb].>>”

    I’ve got dozens of Saudi material in my home none of which quotes and is inspired by anything Qutb has written. Remember Qutb was very anti-establishment. Saudi, for the sake its own existence has to be very establishment.

  101. aj — on 11th August, 2006 at 3:17 am  

    hey my comment was deleted. Looks like censorship is alive and thriving on this blog.

    AFAIK, the comment had no obsceneties, was not inciting anything. I guess truth hurts

  102. Vikrant — on 11th August, 2006 at 8:07 am  

    You’ve just put Vik in a tight spot there Raz. Thanking the ISI for saving mum! Who would have thought it?

    Bullocks… ISI could inform MI5 only because it had “insider info” from their jehadi chamchas… obviously blowing up people in India and Afghanistan is different than blowing up flights on Terminal 4… ISI had to rat on its stooges… Neeways my mum landed at Dulles safely… her flight was delayed by 11 hrs.

  103. TheFriendlyInfidel — on 11th August, 2006 at 8:31 am  

    Bikhair,

    Would you have been happier had I written “teachings of violent jihad”?

    TFI

  104. gaz — on 11th August, 2006 at 10:11 am  

    Whatever its other faults the ISI is a vital source of information as I am sure they will have no problems properly torturing people to get information. Sadly UK intelligence agencies are not reasonably able to do this. I won’t lose any sleep over a few idiots being tortured if it prevents planes blown up over the Atlantic.

  105. Roger — on 11th August, 2006 at 10:22 am  

    ““…the teachings of Jihad.”

    I too am inspired by these teachings. They are indeed very inspirational. ”

    The problem is what they inspire, BaT.

    Fundamentalist/conservative- choose your own adjective- muslims in Britain and the west are in a “double bind”. They hate materialism and hedonism, yet their families came for materialist reasons and they often oscillate between hedonism and ascetism themselves. They hate imperialism and oppression but approve of islamic history, much of which consists of imperialism and conquest. They say they are persecuted because they aren’t allowed to persecute the people they want to persecute. They believe islam is obviously and logically true and are completely unable to persuade others of its manifest truth. It’s hardly surprising that soime of them go doolally and decide the answer is to take a short cut to paradise with a few friends.

  106. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 11:09 am  

    Hope your Mom’s okay Vikrant

  107. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 11:13 am  

    good points above – mirax in no. 95.

    not wanting to ‘generalize’ but there’s a hell of a lot of people about who know zilch about religion, theology, what jihad may or may not mean, and listen to some mullah bloke cos they’re supposed to and if they didn’t mummy would tick ‘em off. same sorts of reasons lots of people used to go to church otherwise mrs. jones would say bad stuff about them. if the sermons in the churches were in latin and not many ppl understood what the hell the preacher was saying..well then…gets even more confusing. some may see an analogy here.

  108. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 11:17 am  

    oh its very simple. when a bunch of people feel they’re being ‘othered’ through racism or what have you, and that they are second-class citizens, it’s easy to play on that fear and victimhood and say to them, oh look and this is what else the people who are oppressing you are up to. Simple. Doesn’t take much intelligence to work that one out.

  109. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 11:18 am  

    now of course the more anyone feels they’re being represented as the ‘Other’ the more this dynamic sets in. so that program highlighting all muslims are like this simply compounds that sort of thing.

    not so suprising a lot of people see themselves as one race if they’re Jewish as effectively anti-semitism was responsible for that ‘bonding together’ more as a result of the ‘Other’-ing process.

  110. Roger — on 11th August, 2006 at 11:27 am  

    Except that islam and other religions have the “othering” tendencies built into them. After all, the whole point of a religion- an abrahamic religion, anyway- is to make the members know they’re different from and better than everyone else. The problem comes when other people- as they always do- agree about the different from but not the better than bit. For various reasons both muslims and others tend to differ even more strongly than most religions on just that now.

  111. AsifB — on 11th August, 2006 at 12:02 pm  

    I drove past the first police vans going down Forest Road on Wednesday night. Just another “Police Camera Action” Helicopter chase around the essex end of the North Ciruclar I thought at the time.

    List of the Terror suspects identified with dates of birth and addresses – http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,,1842393,00.html

    No surprise that it is young men in their early to mid 20s (plus a teenager and a 3 year old). Names as expected from the reporting are mainly Pakistani with a lot of E17 home/parental addresses, though the oldest sounds Bangladeshi and has a Stoke Newington postcode.

    The Walthamstow houses appear to be of the transent short term let variety rather than a settled street as at Forest Gate. But in all other respects, until further information becomes available the men involved appear to be from a ‘typical’ or ‘not uncommon’ background for their areas.

    Mirax n0.95 and Roger no.108 are making some interesting observations. Clearly it is almost entirely english speaking westernised youngsters that are most attracted to extremist plots. Yet, there is no simple single solution to the cocktail of alienation (self imposed or otherwise), idealism, victimhood and inferiority versus superiority complexes that lies in behind the would be violent Jihadist mindset

    But equally there is no need for the rest of us to panic. Either they succeed in their plots and run out of supporters or the angry young men will grow up.

  112. AsifB — on 11th August, 2006 at 12:03 pm  

    36 year old (Not an Anti-Toddler sqaud raid)

  113. Kismet Hardy — on 11th August, 2006 at 12:05 pm  

    Can someone please give me york notes on the followin:

    Planes nearly blown up

    Arrests made inwalthamstow, birminghm and high wycombe.

    If the planes were about to be blown up, how come the arrests didn’t happen in heathrow for god’s sake?

  114. Roger — on 11th August, 2006 at 12:17 pm  

    ” Either they succeed in their plots and run out of supporters or the angry young men will grow up. ”

    Unfortunately success may persuade others that god is with them and there may be more angry young men and women on the way.

  115. AsifB — on 11th August, 2006 at 12:32 pm  

    Roger no.117 – I don’t see how suicide bombers can succeed in a free society – they will either literally run out of recruits by blowing themselves up and/or cause more mass revulsion making it harder for the binladenite propoganda to take hold.

    An important point to emphasise here is that we need to remain a free society – forest gate type incidents and unnecessary laws do not of course mitigate ‘victimhood complexes’ – The initial response of Blair to 7/7 was quite spot on when he echoed Ken Livingstone’s sentiment that ‘however many people you kill, you cannot win’

    Surely that is true for the UK so long as our economy holds up – we are a long way form Gaza and Baghdad where people have other excuses.

    Kismet no. 116 – Yes I thought a Bodie and Doyle shoot out at Heathrow would have been good too.
    But real life is not like Bond films -otherwise the only person to know all about the current raids would be John Reid and he wouldn’t learn much because the top officer would be shagging someone when he came round to say thank you

  116. Kismet Hardy — on 11th August, 2006 at 12:45 pm  

    Okay, please explain this to me clearly like I’m a numbnuts:

    They say they know for sure there were around 10 planes or so headed specifically towards america to cause this mass murder of unimaginable scale, right?

    So sure were they of the planes in question and the imminent destruction that would ensue, they had to pretty much shut down Heathrow, right?

    So tell me this. What is a potential bomber, about to board said plane and cause this bit of mass murder, doing in Birmingham at the time?!

  117. Kismet Hardy — on 11th August, 2006 at 12:51 pm  

    Because if you’re saying they would have boarded the planes soon, then shutting down Heathrow was a stunt. If they were sure they’d go on the said planes because they’d bought tickets, why couldn’t they just arrest/ shoot them all on arrival – red handed? Wouldn’t that have been a far more clear cut way of shutting up people like me? You say life isn’t Jmes Bond, AsifB, but to me, it looks like M15 and playing things like it’s more sensationalised than Tom Cruise’s MI:2

  118. PFM — on 11th August, 2006 at 12:53 pm  

    [Still, a textbook cowardly attempt to avoid responsibility for those lovely people sharing your totalitarian death cult.]

    now now Peter lets not take sly digs. why on earth should i accept responsibility for someone elses actions. Islam is about interpretation, these people have obviously picked up the mickey mouse quran and have found a homer simpson type imam.

    But most importantly the the homer simpson type imam speaks in a language they understand. ENGLISH.

    you know the whole sociologist perspective of youth subculture and crime fits in perfectly with the ‘jihadist’ mindset. Damn should have done that sociology degree could of got a PHD out of this :(

  119. PFM — on 11th August, 2006 at 12:55 pm  

    kismet hardy i asked that earlier up, that if all the suspects had been caught why shut down heathrow and cause people problems. The main answer being the security services are not sure they have everyone. The still think a rogue bomber who has escaped the net will try and carry it out.

    maybe its that, or maybe they just jealous of all them people going on holiday.

  120. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 12:55 pm  

    So has anyone got any more information regarding the plot? i saw the evening standard yesterday and they were referring to how there was virtually no information made available to the people stranded at Heathrow etc. Someone mentioned some people were arrested at Heathrow but clearly arrests were made elswhere. It would be nice if information were made available as to how this plot was uncovered etc. etc. Not having any information is so frustrating – for everyone. For some people the frustration manifests itself as extra anxiety and for others it means they don’t take the ‘threat’ seriously. It’s ridiculous – i hope in the next few days the ‘authorities’ think hard about how they’re going to handle this. They’ve released the names of the people arrested but nothing else.

  121. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 12:56 pm  

    most of the people arrested seem incredibly young.

  122. leon — on 11th August, 2006 at 12:59 pm  

    Apparently the US isn’t taking this very seriously:

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/08/10/usa_not_impressed/

    The overall terror threat level for airlines has been raised from yellow to orange, except that the level for UK flights bound for the USA has been raised to red. When asked why DHS had made this exception, Chertoff explained that it was meant to harmonize the US assessment with the British assessment: a polite way of saying that, for now, America is willing to humor UK officials.

    Chertoff’s demeanor and body language belied any notion that there’s a serious emergency. This means either that US officials are quite underwhelmed by the UK’s evidence of a feasible terrorist plot, or that the US government’s casual indifference toward catastrophic loss of life and property, as exhibited when New Orleans was destroyed, is the new American attitude.

    In favor of option one, we have a recent history of British eagerness to announce breakthroughs in the struggle against the forces of darkness, with nothing to show for it. We have Jean Charles de Menezes shot to bits at point-blank range for behaving oddly just after the 7/7 atrocity. We have the imaginary ricin plot. We have the imaginary chemical bomb plot. And we have the imaginary red-mercury suitcase nuke plot.

    There’s been a lot of crying wolf in London, so it should surprise no one to find that the Americans have heard enough of it.

  123. PFM — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:00 pm  

    well apparently sonia, the pakistani security services captured someone who revealed this plot, then the british goverment acted. It goes to show that in reality they ewre unaware until told by a foreign country. Mad that its, shows how crap they really are.

    all we know is they were gona use drinks bottles for explosive liquid and Mp3s as detonators, apparently.

  124. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:00 pm  

    well this is it, i plan to go on holiday soon and I want some information! how am i supposed to ascertain the risk – and decide to make alternative arrangements – if no one will tell me anything. For example, one amusing response to my blog post about this was from the witty Leighton Cooke who said ‘The coach to Amsterdam will be full then!’ heh – which is probably true.. But if i’m going to have to get a bunch of trains and coaches instead of a flight im going to need a no. of additional visas..

    Have noticed that some of the arrestees have the same surname i do which i guess will mean lots of interrogation for me at Heathrow. oh what joy

    I really don’t get what terrorists hope to gain apart from making life impossible for everyone else – and in particular their ‘Community’.

  125. Kismet Hardy — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:01 pm  

    I’m sorry but seing as terms such as ‘mass murder on an unimaginable scale’ and ‘potentially worse than 9/11′have been bandied about so much it almost seems (judging by the reaction of some) that it actually happenned – we need to be told if the scale relly would have been that catastrophic. If it turns out ‘traces’ were found, I’m going to find myself arrested next time I get hassled by a copper cunt (as I did yesterday in Paddington)

    And I’m sick of people saying ‘it’s better to act over-the-top to be on the safe side’

    All I know is this: to win the war on terror, you have to keep people terrified

  126. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:04 pm  

    ah thanks PFM. people keep referring to liquid explosives but i’ve heard no scientific information as yet, or how the hell one carries around liquid explosives without exploding yourself at the wrong moment.

    in any case. i am well and truly fed up. perhaps we can place a very big banner somewhere that reads – any existing or future terrorists please go to Mars where you will be met by George Bush and other people who want to fight Wars. Can you all ( politicians included here) fuck off and fight your wars somewhere else PLEASE.

  127. PFM — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:05 pm  

    Sonia why dont you go to brighton ;) lol cheap and cheerful.

    kismet your post reminds me of the time of 9/11 when we were told upto 8000 people had died, then it was 7000, then 6000, then… you get the idea.

    over sensationalisation (long word alert) is needed to get peoples attention nowadays.

  128. PFM — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:06 pm  

    Sonia why dont you go to brighton ;) lol cheap and cheerful.

    kismet your post reminds me of the time of 9/11 when we were told upto 8000 people had died, then it was 7000, then 6000, then…. you get the idea.

    over sensationalisation (long word alert) is needed to get peoples attention nowadays.

  129. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:06 pm  

    Perhaps these terrorists hadn’t ever been to the US before – they don’t let people take drinks bottles on board with them. Last April when i went to LA, at heathrow i was eating my sandwich and having a drink of water and they wouldn’t let me take the open bottle past security. i had to finish it, and chuck it, and leave my lighter behind as well. blokey at counter said he had such a big lighter collection he was thinking of setting up shop, he heh.

  130. PFM — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:08 pm  

    please dont send them to mars, the ‘M’ in my id refers to mars, so thanks but no thanks.

    yeh lighters aint allowed on board but bottles, actually i saw someone rip a plastic volvic bottle and try stabbing someone with it so i can see where they are coming from.

  131. leon — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:09 pm  

    And I’m sick of people saying ‘it’s better to act over-the-top to be on the safe side’

    Indeed, me too. I read a great saying somewhere yesterday which went something like “Give me freedom with a danger, than slavery with peace.”

  132. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:09 pm  

    128 – kismet, hehe. Well you know the Media has to extract as much headline juice as possible from such events – otherwise they feel they’ve lost the ‘scoop’. I suppose us bloggers better rake up all the googlejuice we can too!

    not to tempt fate or anything but men usually tend to be the ones the police treat with more suspicion. I guess since statistically more violence is perpetrated by men so..

    Ah what a thought. Instead of all this focus on oh look its the muslims innit, i may suggest the females of the world unite and say oh look it’s them men, them the ones that cause all the trouble..

    chortle chortle. one must always extract maximum amusement from any situation. have learned that the hard way..!

  133. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:11 pm  

    well im sick of that too ( And I’m sick of people saying ‘it’s better to act over-the-top to be on the safe side’) because they’re usually the same people who think the iraqis wanted to be bombed into democracy. And wouldn’t value having life over a measly vote.

  134. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:13 pm  

    Anyway, surely at this rate the US and UK ought to be bombing Pakistan – according to their usual policy anyway.

    “Oh look, we have to demolish Karachi because of a few suspects. Everybody else please evacuate. If you haven’t evacuated we will know you are a terrorist” ..and then bomb all the roads and bridges and airport so that no one can get out!

  135. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:18 pm  

    kismet your question 116 is what i’d been wondering for a good while

    “So tell me this. What is a potential bomber, about to board said plane and cause this bit of mass murder, doing in Birmingham at the time?!”

    or high wycombe. or Waltham Forest! ( other end of London WF innit..) i suppose what PFM said explains it – that they knew about it before, got some people at the airport and got some elsewhere. of course this makes it all the more possible that its highly likely they nabbed the wrong person at heathrow! ooh can’t you just see – we’re looking for Mr. Ali – ah there he is ( could take your pick with a surname like ALi) – oh and look he’s got a mobile, an ipod, and a bottle of water.. Hell it could’ve been anyone. the point is that unless the authorities tell us more, a lot of people are going to wonder if they’ve bungled this whole operation. ooh and that isn’t saying the same thing as ‘there’s NO threat’ – but realising that there may be a threat and the cops don’t know where/who/what etc.

  136. leon — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:19 pm  

    As ever Informed Comment has something interesting to say: http://www.juancole.com/2006/08/pakistan-connection-pakistani-police.html

  137. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:20 pm  

    the sepia mutiny humour thread is pretty funny

    http://www.desipundit.com/2006/08/10/love-in-the-time-of-terrorism/

  138. leon — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:22 pm  
  139. bananabrain — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:25 pm  

    excellent piece by gerard baker in the times – and you’ll see all these arguments regularly presented here – not to say that i am an uncritical supporter of blair, let alone bush.

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,6-2307863,00.html

    eteraz – just read your piece. it’s excellent.

    b’shalom

    bananabrain

  140. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:27 pm  

    neighbour’s comments:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,,1842306,00.html

  141. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:30 pm  

    “Popular trust in government is a necessary foundation of a society’s defences against terrorism. We need to believe we are being told the truth and that our government is acting in good faith. Unfortunately there is now sufficient reason to be sceptical about who we should entrust our security to”

    well said by dan the man in the Guardian

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,,1842186,00.html

  142. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:33 pm  

    banabrain that’s a terrible article says absolutely nothing new. the usual let’s ‘err on the side of caution and don’t let anyone suggest our own killing is as illegitimate as any terrorist’s actions’

    oh no.

    :-)

  143. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:34 pm  

    Do you seriously read that stuff and not see the hypocrisy BananaBrain? Seriously do you?

  144. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:37 pm  

    i mean everyone tries to justify their violent actions by saying ‘oh ,we didn’t start this war – they did’ That’s what THEY ALL say. an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth – everyone’s eyeless and toothless, no one can remember WHO started it, but it doesn’t seem to matter because by then they’re hooked on the violence.

    I’ve said this before and ill say it again – these disgusting governments and terrorists have more in commmon than they like to admit.

    DISGUSTING. Phooey, if we ever needed some Hippie Peace movement type thing NOW IS THE TIME!

  145. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:39 pm  

    They didn’t ban hand luggage after 9/11 – why are they doing it NOW?

  146. AsifB — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:55 pm  

    Kismet/Sonia no.116-118 : I share your concerns – I made the “life is not like James Bond” remark because I want them not to have made a mistake.

    My first instinct is not to trust the authorities – so if they get it so publicly wrong or leave doubt in the heads of people like yourselves – think how much comfort/self righteous aggrandisement such cock-ups give to actual wannabe jihadists.

    Kismet no.122 All I know is this: to win the war on terror, you have to keep people terrified

    I see what you mean but I think it has also been demonstrated over the past 5 years, that the very phrase “war on terror” only makes people cynical – so we have all become harder to terrify in that sense.

  147. bananabrain — on 11th August, 2006 at 1:57 pm  

    let’s ‘err on the side of caution and don’t let anyone suggest our own killing is as illegitimate as any terrorist’s actions’

    sonia, i don’t accept that. if you can’t see the difference between the actions of accountable, democratic nation-states who can be forced to accept the consequences of their actions both under international law and their own electoral systems and a bunch of people who want to murder anyone that doesn’t agree with them, i think you are having a serious attack of moral relativism. i don’t accept that the US, UK, hell, even israel set out to kill civilians on purpose. ok, they may not take sufficient care not do kill them by accident and that is a horrible thing and something for which they are given constant cause for regret, but the people who ought to have that on their conscience are the terror groups that made cities, trains, planes and homes the battleground, for TACTICAL reasons! – and of course so they can fight on equal terms to APPEAL TO THE JADED HYPOCRISY OF THE MEDIA. this constant moral equivalence absolutely disgusts me.

    b’shalom

    bananabrain

  148. Bert Preast — on 11th August, 2006 at 2:04 pm  

    Kismet and Sonia – the kerfuffle at the airports was not just to scare people. The security services can never be sure they have nicked everyone involved, and in this case they certainly aren’t. And the reaction of any bombers still on the loose may well be to bring the operation forward and go for it – if security is lax enough to let them.

  149. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 2:07 pm  

    banabrain – don’t accept it if you don’t want – but if you’ve ever actually been in a city where bombs are raining down, and think it would make a difference to you that some of your loved ones bodies have been blown apart by x or y, come and talk to me then honey, until then, you think what you like :-)

  150. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 2:08 pm  

    OOh Pert Breast, i didn’t think the kerfuffle at the airport was to scare anyone. We’re all scared already, can’t ya tell?

  151. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 2:09 pm  

    If there are bombers out there – catch them. then tell everyone how you caught them and why.

    where’s the problem in that?

  152. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 2:10 pm  

    i can type faster than you perty.. so do explain to me how you interpret what i said as the kerfuffle was just to scare people. no what i said is that they may well have nabbed someone else. can you read?

  153. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 2:12 pm  

    Banana Brain – you’re entitled to your opinion and i’m entitled to mine. Don’t patronize me by talking to me about moral relativism.

    Puh-leese

  154. Sid — on 11th August, 2006 at 2:16 pm  

    Moral relativism presumes that the subject has the inherrant right to a moral absolutism. And thats a crock of shite not to mention a tautology.

  155. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 2:31 pm  

    I find it offensive and outrageous that Banabanabrain would dare suggest that someone who’s family has been killed by a ‘democratic accountable nation’ has not got the right to the same moral outrage as someone who’s family has been killed by terrorists. Oh so once the death is happened you can go to a court can you – and hold the govt. accountable> I think not.

  156. jay — on 11th August, 2006 at 2:38 pm  

    I’m begining to wonder why a certain section of the UK population is disproportianate in the production of violent religious nutters, not just terrorists, but across the spectrum from self appointed domestic “religous police” to international jihadis.

    Inbreeding is known to intensify increased agression with decreased intelligence.

    I’m seriously wondering whether a study should be done.

  157. sonia — on 11th August, 2006 at 2:49 pm  

    yes jay – i agree and i think that section which displays ‘disproportionate violence’ is called MEN and you’ll find that applies across the world.

    I agree a study should be done. Perhaps we may find the reasons social or biological – if it’s biological i’m afraid we may have to destroy the section or prohibit them from perpetuating this ‘inbreeding’.

    :-)

  158. bananabrain — on 11th August, 2006 at 3:50 pm  

    bananabrain – don’t accept it if you don’t want – but if you’ve ever actually been in a city where bombs are raining down, and think it would make a difference to you that some of your loved ones bodies have been blown apart by x or y, come and talk to me then honey, until then, you think what you like
    so, basically, your point is that until i’ve been in an air raid, i’m not entitled to an opinion? does having to take the tube to work count, considering i’m risking my life every time i do that? and, if you’ve read some of my other posts, does the fact that rockets are raining down on my auntie and cousins and friends who live in northern israel, or at least did until they had to take to their bomb shelters, give me the right to an opinion? by that logic, you have no right to criticise israel or israelis, because you’ve never been one. and that of course is bollocks, isn’t it? so i think i’m entitled to my opinion, sweetiepie.

    incidentally, something’s just occurred to me. you know how the israelis mostly seem to have the option of going to bomb shelters? why don’t the lebanese? could it be that the israelis built bomb shelters because they were used to being bombed and the lebanese generally didn’t get bombed, even during the israeli occupation of lebanon? doesn’t that just give you a tiny indication of which direction the aggression really goes in? have you seen anyone in the arab world criticising the intentional targeting of israeli civilians by hizbollah and lamenting israeli casualties, let alone apologising for them?

    then tell everyone how you caught them and why. where’s the problem in that?
    the problem comes if the means by which you caught them might be useful again in the future and won’t be if you tell everyone about it. it’s a basic reality of intelligence, both human and signals. and it’s one that journalists really, really hate.

    Moral relativism presumes that the subject has the inherrant right to a moral absolutism. And thats a crock of shite not to mention a tautology.
    nonsense. all i am saying is that there is a difference between terrorism and the way that the UK, US and most nations actually act. there is a difference between george bush and hassan nasrallah. there is a difference between tony blair and mahmoud ahmadinejad. there is a difference between israel and syria. the fact that any fool can term just about anything “terrorism”, the same way as anyone can call anything “racism” or whatever else happens to be the fashionable enemy at any given moment, just means that language is a flawed tool. if you can’t see the difference, i’d like you to try saying what you say here in hizbollahville, tehran or damascus. there is a difference between accountable democracies and gangs of terrorists and if you can’t see it then perhaps that is down to my lamentable arguments and poor command of english. i am sorry for that.

    I find it offensive and outrageous that Banabanabrain would dare suggest that someone who’s family has been killed by a ‘democratic accountable nation’ has not got the right to the same moral outrage as someone who’s family has been killed by terrorists. Oh so once the death is happened you can go to a court can you – and hold the govt. accountable? I think not.
    i’ll say just two words to that – kahan commission. i will also point you to the numerous investigations into events such as haditha, the deaths of tom hurndall and rachel corrie, both those conducted by courts, special prosecutors etc as well as the truly unaccountable media. what you are essentially saying here is that you have no faith in democratic institutions such as that of an independent judiciary. let me remind you that the people making life most difficult for the government of the UK in its fight against terrorism are our own judges and people exercising their civil liberties, which they would not be able to do under a theocracy. i’m not meaning to get nasty here, i just sincerely don’t understand why the characteristics of democratic governance are not being given their due.

    b’shalom

    bananabrain

  159. Bert Preast — on 11th August, 2006 at 4:01 pm  

    Sonia – My kerfuffle bit was referring to Kismet in 116 and 117 and yourself in 126 and 129. The rozzers don’t want to risk lifting bombers in crowded airports in case they explode.

  160. Bikhair aka Taqiyyah — on 11th August, 2006 at 6:34 pm  

    TheFriendly,

    “Would you have been happier had I written “teachings of violent jihad”?”

    No. Violent jihad is apart of the jurisprudence of Jihad. You arent suggesting that Muslims arent allowed to be violent? Violence has such a bad rap. YOu know violence has been employed in the service of good you know. You arent a pacifist are you? Doesnt sound like you are. My problem is that there are certain behaviors and actions that are called jihad when in fact they arent. Jihad includes violence but not all violence from Muslims is jihad. You can try again though.

  161. Bikhair aka Taqiyyah — on 11th August, 2006 at 6:38 pm  

    Roger,

    “The problem is what they inspire, BaT.”

    Due to my spirituality I cannot accept that when a Muslims is taught Jihad they are inspired to act against its teachings. One reason is that in Islam when knowledge of something comes to you then you have to act upon it. Another reason is when you knowledge increases your faith increases which exposes you to goodness.

    “They believe islam is obviously and logically true and are completely unable to persuade others of its manifest truth.”

    I believe the latter part and accept the former as a fact.

  162. aj — on 11th August, 2006 at 6:56 pm  

    Moderators:
    Two of my innocuous comments were deleted. What are your moderation policies. Care to respond by email.
    thanks

  163. Roger — on 12th August, 2006 at 8:26 am  

    “I cannot accept that when a Muslims is taught Jihad they are inspired to act against its teachings.”
    A roblem is that other teachers disagree presumably as to just what its teachings are. I don’t mind the spirutual effects of religious belief; unfortuanately those spiritual effects seem to inspire the people affected to try to tic physical things toeveryone else.

  164. BevanKieran — on 12th August, 2006 at 11:48 am  
  165. BevanKieran — on 12th August, 2006 at 11:59 am  

    Muslims MP’s and several Muslim groups have called for an urgent change in Britain’s foreign to avert more (attempted) terrorist attacks. The signatories aren’t listed but as far as I am aware they are all prominent Muslim MP’s and Lords.

    Given that I think the best way to treat these terrorists is to isolate them from the rest of the Muslim population, it doesn’t help when these community spokesman latch onto the threat of terrorism to amplify their grievances over foreign policy. In effect, terrorists become part of the Muslim lobby, something Vince Cable has noted later in the article.

  166. BevanKieran — on 12th August, 2006 at 12:06 pm  

    Given that I think the best way to treat these terrorists is to isolate them from the rest of the Muslim population.

    For example, instead of saying these were just nice lads who became radicalised through foreign policy, just say these guys are fucked in the head.

    On a wider point, who wants any foreign policy to be dictated by terrorism?

  167. Raza — on 12th August, 2006 at 12:11 pm  

    Please excuse ur disgusting and vile language!!

  168. Raza — on 12th August, 2006 at 12:21 pm  

    I don’t but if it is Islam you are referring to as terrorists than i think you are out of order

  169. Bilal Patel — on 28th August, 2006 at 11:50 pm  

    What’s important to me is that government is obsessed with making us all scared. Even when the IRA tried to blow up the British Government and were blasting bombs in the capital every other day it seemed, we were told to get on with life as normal.

    Now we politicians pumping up the fear factor at every opportunity. It’s blatant opportunism in the style of Stalin and Hitler.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
With the help of PHP and Wordpress.